The court also will consider issues of workplace preference based on age.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court said today it will reconsider the scope of the familiar police warnings that begin, "You have the right to remain silent."
The court will look at whether physical evidence seized without such warnings can be used at trial.
The case is a follow-up to a Supreme Court ruling three years ago that upheld the warnings laid out in 1966 in a case called Miranda vs. Arizona.
The court agreed to hear the Bush administration's appeal in the case of a Colorado man arrested on charges of violating a domestic restraining order. Police started to read Samuel Patane his Miranda rights, but Patane cut them off. Police then asked Patane if he owned any guns. Told yes, police looked for and found an illegal pistol.
A federal appeals court ruled that the pistol could not be used against Patane at trial. Police found the gun because they questioned Patane, and the questioning was done without Miranda warnings, the lower court found last year.
Justices' earlier ruling
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reasoned that the Supreme Court had brought on the question with its ruling in 2000 that reaffirmed Miranda. The 2000 case called into question two earlier rulings that would seem to allow searches such as the one at Patane's house, that court said.
The Bush administration argued that the lower court got it wrong.
The court also said it will decide when companies can be punished for treating older workers better than their slightly younger colleagues, a type of reverse discrimination.
The case, to be reviewed in the fall, could open up companies to many more lawsuits from middle-aged workers, in their 40s or 50s.
Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.